No, but I think that a show of strength would have helped the situation. As you know that has been what successful Presidents have done in the past.
With your philosophy Russia could walk into England and take it over…after all we don’t want to go to war right?
The more you show yourself to be a limp wristed weakling, as Obama has done, the more bullies like Putin push you around.
You know all this
Doubtful.
First. Trump was a ratings BONANZA. He dominted the news like few people could.
I story about Trump was worth 30 about Clinton.
Trump was also able to use the media (and the resultant attention) like few people can.
He’s been doing it for years…and he’s damn good at it.
I am not going to show my wife this post. As I maintain you are wrong on both counts. I have called the winner of every single Presidential election as far back as Nixon. The only time I was wrong was Romney 2012. And many laughed at me when I said Hillary would never become President regardless of who the republicans picked including Trump.
Okay…take it back come on…take it back…
Oh and eye exercises work too…SO THERE! 
That he is.
And I am beyond excited about the narrative he will write…much more so than I would have been about Clinton or any of the other GOP candidates.
You are 100% correct prior to Trump winning the nomination. The media loved him for the very reasons that you state. But after he won the nomination all you have to do is check the negative to positive stories written about him and Hillary. That pretty much tells the story.
Well, it is probably going to be a wild ride my friend. I think we have a front row seat to something that has never been seen before in Presidential political history.
As I have said repeatedly to family and friends, I have never seen an election like this…nothing even remotely close in my entire life. I don’t expect that Trump’s Presidency will be any different.
Okay, I still have year end business items to clear up. Good talking with all of you this year. I apologize if I am at times overbearing and hyper partisan. The hyper partisan part is simply because I do believe in the republican philosophy of government when it is actually utilized (last two republican Presidents let me down). Being overbearing is part of my defective personality. I try to balance it out in other ways in my life. Um…I smile a lot 
Know that I have enjoyed the many conversations that I have had with all of you this year. And that I wish you all a Happy, Healthy and Prosperous New Year.
God Bless
ZEB
Agree, Zeb.
I stand corrected on something that David McCullough wrote in one of his amazing historical Books. (READ them if you haven’t, folks!)
(Paraphrasing):
Presidents don’t really “write” their narrative…as much as it have their narrative written for them by the times and the circumstances. (This is also the reason I am so vehemently opposed to “comparing” President’s with one another).
Reagan was Reagan…Obama was Obama…and Trump will be Trump…
Each with their own unique story.
The issue becomes who is doing the writing. Bush got engulfed with the mortgage meltdown when it was Clinton who removed the banking regulations in 1999. Bush was also pinned on the lack of WMD’s when the CIA said they existed, the same CIA which is now saying that Russians were behind the email hack.
I don’t know if we will ever reach a point of nonpartisan news and journalism.
There’s a very easy way to address your skepticism…
You believe black people are better at basketball because when you look at top-level basketball players, the majority are black. Based on these observations, you have concluded that blacks must possess some sort of innate genetic superiority in this regard. This seems so intuitively obvious to you that it need not be demonstrated scientifically.
But as I have pointed out earlier (apparently, and puzzlingly, to little effect), if you had lived 90 years ago, you would have been just as convinced that Jews were genetically-superior basketball players, and it would have been so intuitively obvious that, as now, you would have waved away the need for actual scientific evidence. But despite this, you continue to cling to the discredited notion that your observations provide a sound basis for inferring genetic causality.
BTW, I never said it was “irrational” to believe these things. Nor do I fault anyone for believing them initially. But it is irrational to continue to believe them after 1) their ahistorical flaws are demonstrated, and 2) actual science indicates they are incorrect.
That is correct.
The actual evidence (as opposed to obviously flawed casual observations and anecdotes) suggests otherwise.
No, but I would acknowledge that your response to my comment has been superfluous.
Will Smith and Brad Pitt differ in appearance largely because of their genetics. Likewise, Brad Pitt and George Clooney differ in appearance largely because of their genetics. Does it follow that Brad Pitt and George Clooney are of different races?
Let us assume that bona fide research determined that, in the US circa 2016, people with brown hair are richer (on average). The issue at hand is whether, based on that fact, you would conclude that the genes determining hair color correlate with genes that make a person more financially successful. Would you? If not, what sort of evidence would it take to convince you that the brown hair - financial success relationship did in fact reflect an underlying correlation among genes?
No, I would say the burden is on those who would contend that the bias was genetic in the first place. Again, science doesn’t work by way of a ‘this is what I think is true, now prove me wrong’ model.
To the contrary, the null would be that ‘race’ doesn’t correlate with success in EE. (The null is always of the form ‘the independent variable has no effect upon/relationship with the dependent variable.’)
But the question you are asking is wrong. Just as I would not dispute that American basketball is currently dominated by AAs, I am more than happy to concede that American EE is currently dominated by Asian and white men. The real question is, what is the underlying cause of these patterns? And despite historical and scientific evidence to the contrary, you have concluded that such patterns reflect innate abilities coded for by genes that cluster with those coding for certain arbitrary physical characteristics to form the (scientifically discredited) construct of biological race.
(As an aside, I note that it’s Asian and white men who are genetically superior vis a vis EE. I take it this means you think at least some of the genes responsible for this superiority reside on the Y chromosome?)
I’ve seen this before phrased as “Does the man make the time or does the time make the man?”.
I lean toward the man making the time. Someone can look good at a time of relative calm and prosperity, but it takes real brilliance in a number of abilities for calmness or prosperity to emerge from a time of upheaval and/or economic failure.
I think we understand what transpired. Trump used his ability to read people to recognize that a sizeable segment of the population was anxious and angry about the trajectory of their lives, and he exploited these feelings masterfully.
The key difference is, the rest of us recognized it only in hindsight.
Can you give an example of what would constitute such a show?
I think you have me confused with @therajraj.
Given Trump’s conciliatory reaction to Russia’s recent cyber-aggressions, this is a puzzling statement coming from you.
Back atcha. See you soon I hope.
I did not say that - the “not senseless wars part” if you’ve read it.
But creating an maintaining a credible system of alliances with the power to back it up has been the staple of successful world powers since Assyria. The Persian, Romans, Mongols, French, your beloved British…
US imperial retreat under Trump would be 1930s all over again.
No and no. I have a background in construction and have worked with Trumps of the east in the past.
Real estate development is singularly an area of business where you can prosper on stubbornness and ignoring advice, even turning into a virtue.
This article is interesting in its premise of concentrated mating selection causing minor genetic differences (or trait preference selection) walking hand in hand with cultural norms of the different races. Not sure the biological citation as it is an excerpt.
Edit i am not on board on board humans descended from lower forms, but it is easy to see population getting taller if tall people mate with tall people and have enough food.
This is true, but we still have to deal with the stigmas, stereotypes, and biases that exist now.
Yeah you generally hear the same thing about college campuses as well. Pervasive use but campus police aren’t out on patrol looking for drugs (generally speaking).
Fact. Don’t think Zeb got this
This didn’t have much to do with COINTELPRO and the government destroying the Black Panther Party (amongst many other movements by minorities in this country.)
I will say that I despise the fact that people will vote for democrats blindly, but to most of my people, Voting for a conservative is like voting to go back on the plantation.
It’s odd because most Black people are pretty conservative in a lot of ways, especially pertaining to Christianity. The issue is, Republicans target big government like the DOE or HUD - but Blacks historically have only been able to look to the Federal government to protect their rights and that was only sometimes.
For example, the voter ID laws and gerrymandered districts the Republicans created here in NC were both struck down by the Supreme Court. Multiple Voter ID laws have popped up in the south and been struck down since the Voting Rights Act was not fully renewed by Congress. These types of slights continue to push Blacks away from the conservative party. They want to return power to the states (I can respect that) but the states can’t be trusted to treat us all fairly. I think a lot of it boils down to that. There’s a big fear factor involved when your oppressor is supposed to protect you, give you a job, have your best interest at heart, etc etc.
Just need to make it in business and we can truly create our own culture. We had multiple thriving communities destroyed (Wilmington, NC 1899, Tulsa, OK 1921, Rosewood, FL 1923) prior to the place we are now post integration and civil rights (where we gave up all our businesses to shop at white-owned ones). We haven’t gotten back to those models, but I’m working with a group of people trying to do that.
haha you gave me a rude welcome at first but I appreciate it. I’ll be here!
This is true…to distrust…but weve gone much further than that here and around the world lol.
While credible alliances is undebatable to me, the US has ramped that up into our current situation of basically being in every country of the world other than a half dozen of our closest competitors, we allow our alliances to extend beyond reason (Former Soviet states and clients), and we are footing all of this world policing AND nation building on the backs of the taxpayer, both current and future.
Sorry but you are a construction engineer - how many stories and horizontal entensions can a structure support without the foundation designed for the additions?
IOW
We are following all of these other empires that spread too thin, and then crumpled from within.
Thanks, SkyzykS!
I don’t think that it is an “either/or” proposition…but in many cases some of both.
Also…some periods are so vastly different…and represent such vastly different times…that the comparisons people make can sometimes go beyond unfair to ludicrous. (Like Washington vs. Truman…or even Reagan vs. Obama).
Also; a comment on something Max said about it depending on “Who writes the History”.
That is true…to a point. I think it was also McCullough who said (and most historian agree) that history will often come to a sort of “agreed upon consensus” and tends to weed out, over time, ridiculous extremes. (E.G. it is doubtful that “National Enquirer” articles, over time; or some Supremacist Viewpoint becomes part of the overall historical narrative of an individual).
The history of Presidents are still being written as we speak.
Time will tell what that narrative will ultimately say.
Agree, Max.
That ship has sailed; hit a reef; and sunk.
I try as best as I can to do my research. If a viewpoint seems too partisan or biased…I try…and I mean really try…to get an opposing view.
Sometimes there simply is no consensus (e.g. abortion); and sometimes the topic is just too damn murky and we may never really know (who was responsible for shooting Kennedy?); but I still try.